A novel metal-chain extension reaction: synthesis of (X)[Os(CO)<sub>3</sub>(CN-<i>t</i>-Bu)]<i><sub>n</sub></i>Mn(CO)<sub>5</sub> (X = Cl, Br, I; <i>n</i> = 1, 2, 3)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Complexes of formula (X)[Os(CO)3(CN-t-Bu)]nMn(CO)5 (X = Cl, Br, I; n = 1, 2, 3) have been prepared by the reaction of Os(CO)4(CN-t-Bu) with Mn(CO)5(X) in hexane at room temperature. The characterization of the complexes included the crystal structures of compounds with X = I, n = 1, 3 and X = Cl, Br, n = 2 (2ClA and 2BrB). The trinuclear products were isolated as two isomers. The major isomer (2XA) has an isocyanide ligand attached to each osmium atom, whereas the minor isomer (2XB) has both of these ligands bound to the terminal Os atom. The structures contain OsnMn chains with unbridged OsMn bonds (range of lengths are 2.870(1)2.9245(8) Å) and for compounds with n = 2 or 3 OsOs bonds (range of lengths are 2.8812(4)2.8928(5) Å). The mechanism of formation is believed to involve replacement of a CO ligand with the 18e- ligand Os(CO)4(CN-t-Bu) at the metal with the coordinated halide, followed by a rearrangement in which the halide ligand migrates to the donor Os atom with concomitant migration in the reverse direction of a carbonyl ligand. The preparation of (OC)4(t-BuNC)OsMn(CO)4(Cl) with an OsMn dative bond is also reported along with the (OC)4(t-BuNC)OsRe(CO)4(X) analogues.Key words: manganeseosmium, rheniumosmium, dinuclear, metal chain, dative metalmetal bond.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".